SHAM SUNDER Vs. KANWAR RAJA RAM SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a revision petition by the plaintiffs against the orders dated December 18, 1993 and December 9, 1997 passed by the Sub Judge Ist Class, Ambala City and the Additional District Judge, Ambala, respectively under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2, Civil Procedure Code.

(2.) THE plaintiffs filed a civil suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the management of and possession over the property helonging to the Thakur Dawara at Village Adhoya Hinduan, District Ambala. The plaintiffs No. 1 and 2 claimed to be the Chelas of Mahant Prayag Dass. The said Mahant had died on May 22, 1992. He was managing the Thakur dwara, Mandir and the properties of the Thakur Dwara as Mohatmim. The Mahant appointed plaintiffs No. 1 and 2 as his Chelas by executing a registered will. Thus, the plaintiffs claim that they have been appointed as the successors of the deceased mahant in accordance with the practice and tradition of the Beragi community. They are authorised to manage the property after the death of Mahant Paryag Dass. They, being the duly appointed Mohatmim of the Thakur Dwara, have a right to retain possession of the property. It has also been stated that a civil suit had been earlier filed by the Gram Panchayat claiming the property in question to be the property of the Gram Panchayat. That was a suit for ejectment under Section 7 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961. That suit was dismissed by the Assistant Collector Ist Grade on March 31, 1991. The Gram Panchayat went in appeal before the Collector but that was also dismissed on July 5, 1992. The plaintiffs have alleged that the defendants being former members of the Gram Panchayat wanted to usurp the property of the Thakur Dwara and they threatened the plaintiffs with dis-possession.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the plaintiff-petitioners has argued that there was no dispute with regard to the management and control of the Thakur Dwara and its properties till Mahant Paryag Dass was alive. He was managing the property as a Mohatmim. The dispute arose only after his death. The land in question is a Muafi land. Proceedings under Section 145, Criminal Procedure Code, were initiated and Tehsildar, Ambala, was appointed as a Receiver and Superdar with respect to the properties of the Thakur Dwara. The High Court has vacated the order of the Sub Divisional Magistrate. The learned counsel for the plaintiffs has argued that the plaintiffs also filed a complaint before the Chief Minister alleging therein that the defendants were taking forcible possession of the properties of the Thakur Dwara. Since plaintiffs No. 1 and 2 have been duly appointed as Chelas by the Ex-Mahant, they have every right to manage the affairs of the Thakur Dawara.